File No. 5747/45–46.
It may not be amiss to state that the final result reached in these long
pending claims has made a good impression both on the Panama people and
the Americans resident here and is very favorably commented on as an
evidence of the generous justice of the American Government.
Messrs. Bumpus and Denby have been highly complimented for their tact,
judicial discretion and broadmindedness. They returned to the United
States on the 10th instant.
[Inclosure.]
[From The Canal Record, August 12,
1908.]
To the Hon. Elihu Root, Secretary
of State of the United States, and Horacio F. Alfaro, Secretary
of State of the Republic of Panama:
The joint commissioners, appointed under the provisions of Articles
VI and XV of the treaty between the United States of America and the
Republic of Panama relating to damages caused by the construction
and maintenance of the ship canal across the Isthmus of Panama to
connect the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and dated November 18, 1903,
have the honor to report that, under the authority vested in them by
their respective Governments, they met in the city of Panama on June
8, 1908, and proceeded to qualify for such office by taking the
proper oath before the clerk of the Supreme Court of the Canal
Zone.
They thereupon organized the commission provided for by the treaty,
elected Hon. Edwin Denby chairman of the same, established rules of
procedure, and caused the parties in interest in the cases brought
on for hearing before the commission to be lawfully notified, so
that they might appear before the same at a certain time and place
for the hearing and determination of such causes.
The United States appeared by its attorney, who participated in the
proceedings. Some of the claimants appeared by counsel; others
appeared per se. The United States attorney also brought to the
attention of the commission the fact that certain lands would be
appropriated in the building of such canal, the title to which was
unknown.
In the latter causes, in order that every opportunity might be given
to any party to appear and claim title and damages concerning the
same, the commission caused notice to be published in the Star and
Herald, a paper published in the city of Panama, giving general
notice of the time and place when such causes would be heard. All
the causes heard and determined are set forth in the list embodied
in this report.
Many questions were raised by the attorney for the United States in
some of the cases in reference to the title or interest, if any,
which the claimants therein had in the estates appropriated by the
United States in the premises. The commission carefully considered
and determined all such questions, and, in such cases where damages
were subsequently assessed, have taken this question of title into
consideration in passing upon the extent of damges to be allowed. It
was difficult to determine and not always possible to find, in the
complications which arise in applying the law relating to titles in
this country, whether a claimant might or might not have an absolute
title in the estate affected by reason of any alleged defect in his
title, and, as far as it appeared, his possession of the premises
would have been permanent for all practical purposes. It seems to
the commission, therefore, that such claimants have the right to be
treated as “landholder” under the provision of Clause VI of the
treaty, and damages assessed accordingly.
[Page 676]
Having disposed of the question of title, the commission heard all
the evidence presented bearing upon the fair value of the property
appropriated by the United States (to which section 6 of the treaty
applies) and any damage arising from the same to the property of the
claimants. They especially considered as elements of such valuaton
the extent and character of the property so affected, its location,
for what it was adapted or could be adapted within a reasonable
time; these, as well as other pertinent considerations, were taken
into account, and formed the basis upon which the damages have been
assessed. The commission did not consider the effect the building of
the canal would have upon the value of such estates.
Following is a list of cases so determined and the amount of damages:
| Estates. |
Hectares taken by the United States. |
Claimants. |
Damages
awarded. |
| Cardenas |
126.0 |
Hurtado family represented
by Narciso Garay. |
$10,000 |
| Penas Blancas en
Medio |
218.5 |
Louisa Cerezo and heirs of
Aniceto Cerezo. |
4,000 |
| Juan Grande |
(1) |
Luz Espinosa |
250 |
| El and La Pihiva |
406.0 |
Josefina Jiron and Angilica
Jiron |
20,000 |
| Tabernilla |
183.5 |
Jean Gris and Ramon M.
Valdez |
4,500 |
| Bailomonos |
102.0 |
Heirs of Francisco Ardilla,
heirs of Remigio, Dutari Correa, Alfaro Hermanos, heirs
of Carlos Icaza Arosemena, damages for whole
estate. |
2,000 |
| Calle Bruja |
248.0 |
Unknown |
2,480 |
| Palo Horqueta and
Matias |
576.0 |
do |
5,760 |
| Barro Colorado and
Palenquilla |
162.5 |
do |
1,625 |
| Palenquilla and Frijol
Grande |
190.0 |
do |
1,900 |
| Barro Colorado and Frijol
Grande |
72.5 |
do |
725 |
| Santa Cruz |
74.0 |
do |
740 |
| Hacienda Andrade |
|
Antonio Andrade |
90,000 |
As part of the damages caused by the various claimants represented by
Messrs. Teran and Hinckley, we allow the sum of $481 gold as costs
expended in behalf of the said claimants, same to be paid by the
Government of the United States to Dr. Oscar Teran.
Interest also is to be paid upon the said awards from the date of
this report at the rate of 6 per cent per annum until the same shall
be paid or tendered by the Government of the United States. In so
far as the cases involving unknown claimants are concerned we direct
that the Government of the United States pay into the Supreme Court
of the Canal Zone, or any other court having competent jurisdiction,
upon the request of any party claiming to have an interest in any of
such awards, the amount of the sum awarded therein.
The United States requested that the damages should be awarded by the
hectare, claiming that as to some of the estates affected an
accurate survey had not been obtained of the amount to be
appropriated and only an estimation of the same could be given. The
commission is, however, of the opinion that it should follow the
ordinary rule of allowing damages in full and that any other course
might create future confusion, and perhaps controversies, in
reference to the amount and character of the property appropriated.
It is also of the opinion that the variation between the amount of
area estimated and that which might be determined upon a survey is
not of substantial moment, and, if in any case such happens to be
the fact, it could have been cured by a proper prior survey of the
same.
The claim set up by Ernesto Arosemena for damages arising from the
expropriation of the estate of Mamei y Culo Seco was withdrawn.
In the cases of Penas Blancas en Medio and Bailomonos, damages were
claimed on account of the fact that the Panama Railroad Co. had
issued passes over its railroad for the benefit of the landowners or
landholders in consideration of being given a right of way over the
estates affected. We have not considered such claims in estimating
the damages, but reserved to the parties any rights they may have to
enforce such claims in the premises.
In the matter of the claim of Antonio Andrade, wherein the Government
objected to certain elements of damages to be considered, we have
overruled
[Page 677]
the objection
and have assessed the same upon the principle that he is to be
allowed the amount which, as landholder, his property will be
affected by the action of the United States in taking same for canal
purposes.
In submtting this report, it may not be deemed amiss to congratulate
all parties concerned that these complicated and difficult questions
have been conclusively determined by the unanimous action of the
commission and the rights of all in interest, as we believe, fully
and amply protected. It is also proper to add that we have been
greatly aided in coming to determination by the zeal and ability
displayed by counsel of the United States Government, as well as by
counsel who represented some of the claimants.
- Edwin Denby, Chairman,
- Everett C. Bumpus,
Commissioners on behalf of the
Government of the United States.
- Gil Ponce J..,
- Julio J. Frabega,
Commissioners on behalf of the
Government of the Republic of Panama.
expropriation
proceedings.
Cases determined: Juan Diaz Cabellero, containing 83,618
hectares; Gavilan and Gavilancito, containing 17 hectares; San
Lazaro, containing 1 hectare.
findings of edwin denby,
umpire.
The question of title does not arise in any of these cases, as
the titles of claimants are undisputed. Claimants challenge the
right of the Government of the United States to abandon a
portion of a tract once noticed for expropriation and concerning
which a trial has been had before commissioners, but no
agreement reached.
I find that the United States has the right to abandon before
final judgment, but must give fair compensation to owners for
occupation, actual or presumed, of the land and pay any
incidental damages accruing therefrom.
I find the United States is liable in damages as follows: To Mr.
Francis Schuber for the occupation and use for four years of the
property known as Corozal, situatd on the estate of Juan Diaz
Cabellero, for the damages done by the occupation and subsequent
abandonment of 75 hectares, more or less, of the said estate,
and for the value of 83,816 hectares of land now expropriated,
$45,000 gold, with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum
from the date of this report.
To Maria Concepcion, Sosa, for the expropriation of 17 hectares
of the estate known as Gavilan and Gavilancito, $15,000 gold,
with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date
of this report.
To Mr. Gabriel Duque, for the occupation for one year of 11
hectares of the estate known as San Lazaro and subsequent
abandonment of the same, and for the expropriation of 1 hectare
of the said estate, $1,000 gold, with interest at the rate of 6
per cent per annum from the date of this report.
